What I learned about the legal system...

TomServo · Post by **TomServo** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:37 pm

The D.A. doesn't give a shit about your innocence or guilt...they want a conviction. California laws regarding "assault weapons" are flexible.. see: Kasler v. Lockyer... that should be the FINAL list, but they keep adding new firearms. Just not on legal paper. House arrest sure beats jail! But is boring as hell! 40 days left... thank dog its only a misdemeanor!

Rabbi Dali Rick · Post by **Rabbi Dali Rick** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:43 pm

I'm assuming your guilty as hell, but what did you do?...

the rebbi

TomServo · Post by **TomServo** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:00 pm

Accidental discharge. I called the cops to report it...which was my first mistake.

They originally charged me with willful discharge in a grossly neglegent manner. The DA added two more. In a plea bargain, they offered to drop the discharge and maliscious charges, so long as I plead guilty to possesion of an illegal assault weapon...until I provided a letter from the Dept. Of Justice, saying I owned the firearm legally. The attorney looked pissed at the hearing. Heehee... so. They went back to the original charge. And, to avoid the whole AW bullshit and possible lawsuits, I plead no contest. May not have been the best thing to do, but I wasn't about to tangle with the fucked up puzzle of california assault weapon laws. Regret what I did, but learned that owing up to a stupid mistake isn't always your best option.

Post by **Sham** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 5:15 am

A good rule of thumb in the future is to avoid prosecutors and district attorneys at any cost. You are right Tom that they honestly don't care about guilt or innocents, but rather can they get a conviction and put another re-election feather in their cap. Once you get the attention of the "system", you are usually screwed unless you are willing to pump lots of money into lawyers. If you don't have the money, then they will steam roll over you.

Interestingly enough, if a police officer (or his commander) thinks that there was a crime committed, it continues to get passed up the line until it finally gets to the courts, no matter how minor the crime. Even at that point, a jury feels the pressure to continue to move on to conviction. It's a system that's supposed to assume innocents until proven guilty, but boy is it being manipulated lately for political gain. The system stinks and there is no one to fix it.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 5:53 am

Plea bargains are the very definition of extortion.
You can't expect any morality in a system that uses them.
If anything brings this country down, it will be the court system.

Interestingly, china just executed two white collar criminals that would have been unlikely to even be charged here.
So they are ahead of the usa in that respect.

Did you try to get assistance from any organizations in your case?

As you know, "assault weapon laws" have nothing to do with any assault weapons, since they were all regulated a long time ago.
They do serve to drive up costs for americans drastically, at the huge benefit of a few.
My favorite idiotic phrase is "high-powered assault rifle," assault weapons all being medium to low powered.
It looks like the usa sport rifle design is now finding its way into military weapons, so true automatic assault weapons may soon not fit the twisted "definition" used in the phony laws here.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 5:58 am

California-

Anyone there should be aware most companies will no longer take returns from california due to the vague and shifting definitions there.
This applies to guns and ammunition both.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:29 pm

I believe that you also learned something about "treat every gun as if it was loaded" as well...

Just be glad you weren't caught with a balisong knife.

felony ^

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 10:02 pm

I think there is a legal version of that too.

No doubt it's a great consolation to be killed with a legal knife.

I understand many people get hurt or killed doing without the many single hand knives that were invented for such jobs, electrician, etc.
There is supposed to be some allowance for these purposes, but I don't think the versions work as well as the common european versions.
Who thinks up this bullshit?

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:15 am

you know exactly who thinks it up.......

politicians, mostly left wing, who, want to make the world safe.......
and, make sure "the man" is the only person we can count on to protect us......
and, allow criminals to accost us without the concern of being injured.

of course, IMHO.....

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:50 am

TomServo wrote:Accidental discharge. I called the cops to report it...which was my first mistake.

They originally charged me with willful discharge in a grossly neglegent manner. The DA added two more. In a plea bargain, they offered to drop the discharge and maliscious charges, so long as I plead guilty to possesion of an illegal assault weapon...until I provided a letter from the Dept. Of Justice, saying I owned the firearm legally. The attorney looked pissed at the hearing. Heehee... so. They went back to the original charge. And, to avoid the whole AW bullshit and possible lawsuits, I plead no contest. May not have been the best thing to do, but I wasn't about to tangle with the fucked up puzzle of california assault weapon laws. Regret what I did, but learned that owing up to a stupid mistake isn't always your best option.

well, Tom, at least it's on the way to over.......glad you got out of it as "cleanly" as you did........

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:26 am

I believe most of those laws were written by the 'law and order' crowd.
Note that you can own all the assault weapons you want, if you have enough money. (And I mean real ones, not the semi-automatic Tom had.)
That is no accident.

California may have it's own weird twist on this though.
I won't pretend to understand anything in california politics.
But a party that wants to interfere in people's lives unnecessarily is no longer left anything, whatever they say.

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:13 am

gyre wrote:I believe most of those laws were written by the 'law and order' crowd.
Note that you can own all the assault weapons you want, if you have enough money. (And I mean real ones, not the semi-automatic Tom had.)
That is no accident.

California may have it's own weird twist on this though.
I won't pretend to understand anything in california politics.
But a party that wants to interfere in people's lives unnecessarily is no longer left anything, whatever they say.

then why are you always commenting on and referring to it?

who is the "law and order" crowd?

What do you mean by "owning all the assault weapons you want , if , you have enough money"?

you've got all these statements, that seem "half baked" and, no reference to where they apply......

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:53 am

ygmir wrote:you know exactly who thinks it up.......

politicians, mostly left wing, who, want to make the world safe.......
and, make sure "the man" is the only person we can count on to protect us......
and, allow criminals to accost us without the concern of being injured.

of course, IMHO.....

Actually, the felony designation on balisong knives was developed to hit ethnic gangs. Not exactly a left-wing specialty.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:06 am

Every time I order anything, look at a catalog, buy a car, own a car, work on a car, etc etc, I am reminded and informed of some new prohibition that california has imposed, usually without any meaningful explanation.
I am sure the politics are plenty convoluted, but even when I try to understand it, most people living there don't either.

Thousands of miles away california has cost me a lot of money with nutty car rules.
I wholeheartedly wish I could intervene in california politics to the extent they have interfered in my life.
And some of it is a deliberate attempt to control the rest of the nation.
Who the fuck is Dianne Feinstein and why would anyone vote for her?
Can she possibly be worth the trouble she causes?

When I look in any gun or knife catalog or even a magazine with ads, I am inundated with NOT FOR SALE OR USE IN CALIFORNIA tags that seem to be automatically added to any product developed after 1928.
So I hear about it a lot.
And when I order something for Tennessee I am often told that there is no guarantee of legality in california, as a precaution I suppose.
A supplier recently told me they no longer even try to keep up with changes in california.
It's order at your own risk and check the law.
No returns.

What do you mean by "owning all the assault weapons you want , if , you have enough money"?

This right was written into the law, but no doubt california has circumvented it.
In most states you can own what you want, with enough money and a clean record.
The cost was nominal at one time and is now staggering and being made worse.
I have many friends that own automatic weapons, and many that have had FFLs.
Texas is better on its restrictions than most states, but the entry cost is now stunning, in spite of the real world prices being low (outside the us).

gyre wrote: California may have it's own weird twist on this though.
I won't pretend to understand anything in california politics.

Just full disclosure of how fully baked my knowledge of politics there is.
I often inquire of people that might understand more of it, but without really satisfying results so far.
I think I even asked you about a few things.
I do understand enough about how politics works to know how complex and/or stupid it can all be.
And I'm aware of how state vs metropolitan politics works too.
That seems to be a major component there.
Most people there seem baffled and fed up.

The law and order crowd has for many years been a sort of litmus test for politicians, usually republican but not universally, that showboat on crime issues, typically with no actual effect except to make it worse.
It is usually called something else these days, but it's the same old song.
It usually involves feelgood laws with no actual effect on crime, and negative consequences for non-criminals.

I could give examples and never run out, but you get the idea.
Weird knife and weapon restrictions, carry bans = no legal shootings = no effect on criminals other than the positive and obvious, hate crime laws, violations of constitutional protections (the most infamous, from Hitler to the "patriot act"), to just generally annoying practices designed to look good on election day.
Here they set up illegal roadblocks and go after strip clubs.
Crime skyrockets.

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:58 am

Ugly Dougly wrote:
ygmir wrote:you know exactly who thinks it up.......

politicians, mostly left wing, who, want to make the world safe.......
and, make sure "the man" is the only person we can count on to protect us......
and, allow criminals to accost us without the concern of being injured.

of course, IMHO.....
Actually, the felony designation on balisong knives was developed to hit ethnic gangs. Not exactly a left-wing specialty.

I dis-agree..........
I'd say most of those type regulations and laws are the "lets all hug and love eachother, and, no one will hurt us" group.

perhaps, LE did ask for that to target gangs.......but one of many, if that's the case.

I still say weapon legislation, for the majority of it, comes from the left.

(I purposely don't use dem/rep designations in this)

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:22 pm

gyre wrote:Every time I order anything, look at a catalog, buy a car, own a car, work on a car, etc etc, I am reminded and informed of some new prohibition that california has imposed, usually without any meaningful explanation.
I am sure the politics are plenty convoluted, but even when I try to understand it, most people living there don't either.

Thousands of miles away california has cost me a lot of money with nutty car rules.
I wholeheartedly wish I could intervene in california politics to the extent they have interfered in my life.
And some of it is a deliberate attempt to control the rest of the nation.
Who the fuck is Dianne Feinstein and why would anyone vote for her?
Can she possibly be worth the trouble she causes?

that, is the million dollar question.......the liberals vote her in......
no one I know likes her, but, she keeps on winning,,,,,,mostly city people support her

When I look in any gun or knife catalog or even a magazine with ads, I am inundated with NOT FOR SALE OR USE IN CALIFORNIA tags that seem to be automatically added to any product developed after 1928.
So I hear about it a lot.
And when I order something for Tennessee I am often told that there is no guarantee of legality in california, as a precaution I suppose.
A supplier recently told me they no longer even try to keep up with changes in california.
It's order at your own risk and check the law.
No returns.

What do you mean by "owning all the assault weapons you want , if , you have enough money"?
This right was written into the law, but no doubt california has circumvented it.
In most states you can own what you want, with enough money and a clean record.
The cost was nominal at one time and is now staggering and being made worse.
I have many friends that own automatic weapons, and many that have had FFLs.
Texas is better on its restrictions than most states, but the entry cost is now stunning, in spite of the real world prices being low (outside the us).

gyre wrote: California may have it's own weird twist on this though.
I won't pretend to understand anything in california politics.
Just full disclosure of how fully baked my knowledge of politics there is.
I often inquire of people that might understand more of it, but without really satisfying results so far.
I think I even asked you about a few things.

true, you have......many of us, most I'd say, can't interpret the weapons laws here, let alone understand their intent or applications, even results.

I do understand enough about how politics works to know how complex and/or stupid it can all be.
And I'm aware of how state vs metropolitan politics works too.
That seems to be a major component there.
Most people there seem baffled and fed up.

well said

The law and order crowd has for many years been a sort of litmus test for politicians, usually republican but not universally, that showboat on crime issues, typically with no actual effect except to make it worse.
It is usually called something else these days, but it's the same old song.
It usually involves feelgood laws with no actual effect on crime, and negative consequences for non-criminals.

I would submit the "law and order" crowd is different than the "feelgood" crowd.
IMHO: the "law and order" crowd wants tougher sentencing, enforcement of existing laws, and, fair application
the "feelgood" crowd wants to disarm us, but not be so harsh on violent criminals, because, if we just "understand" them, we'll know why they are violent. And, if we take care of and hug them, they'll be nicer......
(ok, personal ranting there).
They are also behind "hate crime" legislation........and it's unfair applications.......
WTF? How can it be worse to kill or harm one person than another?
Murder is murder, etc.........why should the color of a person skin, religion, etc, matter?
If the existing laws were just applied as intended, it'd work fine, IMHO....we don't need more laws.

I could give examples and never run out, but you get the idea.
Weird knife and weapon restrictions, carry bans = no legal shootings = no effect on criminals other than the positive and obvious, hate crime laws, violations of constitutional protections (the most infamous, from Hitler to the "patriot act"), to just generally annoying practices designed to look good on election day.
Here they set up illegal roadblocks and go after strip clubs.
Crime skyrockets.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:41 pm

Hate crime law has already been used locally to circumvent double jeopardy protection.
If anything should be treated more harshly, I think it should be cold blooded commercial crime.
Much more of a threat.

Any kind of legislation can be feelgood stupidity.

A few years ago california stiffened the penalty for rape in certain circumstances.
Sounds fine, right?

As soon as the first longer sentences hit the penal system, all victims of that crime after that point were killed.

Whoops.

What works has to be what is important, not what sounds good.
No law exists in a vacuum.

EspressoDude · Post by **EspressoDude** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:22 pm

Ugly Dougly wrote:I believe that you also learned something about "treat every gun as if it was loaded" as well...

Just be glad you weren't caught with a balisong knife.

felony ^

I think just about everyone that did a Navy WESTPAC tour of duty came back at least one of those....
And every bosun's mate worth his salt could open a 4" Buck folding hunter as fast as a butterfly knife with a flick of the wrist.

Fire_Moose · Post by **Fire_Moose** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:37 pm

see that little nub with the hole in it where the blade meets the handle? When the knife is closed it sticks out on the backside. a little push and a light flick will send the blade out super fast and smooth.

I love CRKT knifes

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:45 pm

gyre wrote:Hate crime law has already been used locally to circumvent double jeopardy protection.

can you, elucidate? you make so many statements with no context......or explanations....

If anything should be treated more harshly, I think it should be cold blooded commercial crime.
Much more of a threat.

if, you could be clearer in your statements.......

commercial crime should have harsher penalties than violent crime?
or, do you mean harsher penalties than now for commercial crime?

Any kind of legislation can be feelgood stupidity.

especially if you dis-agree with it....

A few years ago california stiffened the penalty for rape in certain circumstances.
Sounds fine, right?

As soon as the first longer sentences hit the penal system, all victims of that crime after that point were killed.

I'd say that statement in vapant............you have no idea if that is true, and, it's unprovable.......

please, be clear and accurate

Whoops.

What works has to be what is important, not what sounds good.
No law exists in a vacuum.

true, but, that is also very subjective......... What's important to one may not be so to another........

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:11 pm

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... artner=RSS
http://memphis.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pres ... 020408.htm
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... al-charge/
http://www.justice.gov/usao/tnw/press_r ... ardis.html
http://www.amw.com/missing_persons/case.cfm?id=25774
http://www.memphisflyer.com/memphis/mis ... id=1135243
http://www.wmctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6916901

If there is any actual evidence of a murder, I am unaware of it.
He was forced to confess to make a deal and that was used to re-prosecute him.

commercial crime should have harsher penalties than violent crime?
or, do you mean harsher penalties than now for commercial crime?

Re: Hate Crime Law
I thought that would be clear in context.
I mean commercial crimes v emotional crimes.
They are usually crimes of violence.
Someone cold blooded enough to kill or injure "it's just business" is far more dangerous, I think, than someone who loses their temper.
This is recognized in some law, or used to be.
Would it make you feel better to be killed over $5 rather than something personal about you?
Not me.

The very essence of bad law, and it guarantees unfair application.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:21 pm

I don't know if I can find links about it, but the california story was widely reported at the time and brought up again as sentence guidelines and three strike laws were discussed.
It was reported that the death rate in these crimes went from low to 100% once the word went out about the incentive to murder victims being written into law.
The new law was rapidly withdrawn.

It's a good example of why thought has to go into legislation.
(Not that this is common.)

There have been many other examples in the past, of course.
Marijuana laws in the past, and some of the new ones are cases of this.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:33 pm

Feinstein and the anti-gun crowd certainly showed their ignorance when they designed their assault rifle legislation. Get rid of those bayonets! Think of the children massacred by bayonets in the Wrong Hands!

Left and right, they all prey on the fears of the ill-informed. There are tinfoil hats on both sides of the aisle.

The word is demagoguery, I think.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:37 pm

ygmir wrote:
gyre wrote:

What works has to be what is important, not what sounds good.
No law exists in a vacuum.

true, but, that is also very subjective......... What's important to one may not be so to another........

I have to disagree here.
A goal can be easily stated and the results are usually measurable.
I do recognize how vague politicians can be, and they do sometimes shift their spin to match results.
(I'm not responsible for any boneheaded goals politicians have in the first place.)

As an example, the classic black market created by our drug laws-
They restricted purchase of pseudophedrine.
This is supposed to cut use of meth.

Results-
I have to pay much more to legally purchase the drug for allergies.
And I had to drive hundreds of miles to find it on my trip.
They write my name down.

The cost of meth went up as the supply decreased.
As the cost went up, the quantity smuggled rose sharply.
Now liquid pseudophedrine is imported into mexico and there is no shortage.

Long term results-
A LOT more meth.
Politicians continue to brag about cutting off the meth supply over the counter.
For those with a grasp on reality, it resulted in more meth available.
Did it stop people from making meth from store bought materials?
No.
Turns out criminals have no issues with using fake IDs to buy, or they use fraud.
So they still find meth operations using 24-pack products.

But I guess no one could have seen that coming, drugs having always been so easy to control!?

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:11 pm

I'm not sure how much more of this I can take........

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:26 pm

Is this a flamewar?

There isn't even much disagreement, although I can't figure out what vapant means.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 4:37 pm

I think that this started with the woes of Tom Servo.

Blame him!

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:08 pm

TomServo · Post by **TomServo** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:35 pm

Ugly Dougly wrote:I believe that you also learned something about "treat every gun as if it was loaded" as well...

Just be glad you weren't caught with a balisong knife.

felony ^

It was loaded, and I was unloading it. I understand the rule... I had also been drinking, I didn't feel that buzzed, but the cops thought I was. Like I said, I took it like a big boy. I was just disgusted, by learning all the shit I learned before the trial.

TomServo · Post by **TomServo** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:47 pm

gyre wrote:I believe most of those laws were written by the 'law and order' crowd.
Note that you can own all the assault weapons you want, if you have enough money. (And I mean real ones, not the semi-automatic Tom had.)
That is no accident.

California may have it's own weird twist on this though.
I won't pretend to understand anything in california politics.
But a party that wants to interfere in people's lives unnecessarily is no longer left anything, whatever they say.

Thank you for pointing that out! The first AW was the MG 44? With both semi and full auto functions. When people asked me about my AK, they were under the impression that it was a machine gun. I only wish all the bears...and deer...and elk... could come back to life, and set the record straight, as to what gun is "designed" to kill. I think the ammo might have something to add.

What I learned about the legal system...

What I learned about the legal system...

Oh Snot.....